ID - DeOrr Kunz, Jr., 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #26

[courtneyb]

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/01/isaac-reinwand-i-had-nothing-to-do-with-deorrs-disappearance/


EATON: Do you know anything about Robert Walton, the grandfather?

REINWAND: All I can say about Robert Walton is he’s always been a good friend to me. We’ve gone fishing on many occasions and camping.

EATON: You guys met before all this took place?

REINWAND: That’s correct.

EATON: Are you still friends today?

REINWAND: I haven’t heard from Walton all winter long.

EATON: Have you heard how his health is doing?

REINWAND: I heard he’s on oxygen.


So, the oxygen is a new development? For some reason, I thought it was said that he was on oxygen at the time of the camping trip.

 

[Lillahazel]

I agree. I think the comments alluding to his clumsiness, his "moving and going", the too big boots, etc., don't necessarily mean that their families know exactly what happened. But I think they fully accept that those two are likely responsible for his disappearance and are preemptively offering up info that would support an accident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or the family truly believes DeOrr was clumsy because he always had unexplained "accidents" and JM and VDK always covered them by saying he was clumsy?

 

[bessie]

Or the family truly believes DeOrr was clumsy because he always had unexplained "accidents" and JM and VDK always covered them by saying he was clumsy?

Or, he truly was a little "clumsy".

 

[gliving]

I remember the good ol days on Websleuths when one had to actually read all the threads before commenting.

 

[bessie]

I remember the good ol days on Websleuths when one had to actually read all the threads before commenting.

Now that time is spent perusing FB, dontcha know.

 

[jennapuppy]

Maybe just as an excuse to bring it up, since Nate asked if there were any rumours they wanted to clear up. It seemed to be something the parents had discussed in advance, so maybe they'd planned to bring it up in the interview to make it seem like Deorr was still alive at the store. Then they changed the time as an excuse to bring it up - they're correcting a rumour, they're not just randomly informing the world of their (false) alibi even though no one asked about it, which would look very suspicious.

Yes, it's a stupid thing to do and could easily be proven false (as I believe it has been, as the clerk didn't remember seeing a boy), but claiming that someone in the store was playing with DeOrr was stupid too - Klein said they tracked down the witness and he didn't remember even seeing a child. Maybe it's just a case of Vernalization, where the parents get carried away and think their story sounds more convincing if they add loads of details - not thinking at the time that it will easily be proven false.

Either they made it up themselves, or there was a genuine rumour going around that the clerk saw a man at 6pm with a filthy, bawling boy (even though the clerk said no such thing), in which case why would Vernal be so quick to say Yep, that was me and DeOrr but the got the time wrong, rather than No, that didn't happen; or Holy Smoke, that could have been my son with his abductor!

Maybe there were already rumblings in the community that there was no proof that DeOrr was even at the campground, so VDK thought he would co-opt the rumor and use it as proof that he had been seen with DeOrr. I know that's a rather convoluted theory, but that's par for the course with this case! IMO

 

[ReadySet]

I remember the good ol days on Websleuths when one had to actually read all the threads before commenting.

Was wondering about that myself....as someone who has read every post on every page on every thread...I notice that some things just keep getting recycled over and over and over. That's not meant as a criticism, just an observation. On one hand, some ideas are worth recycling because you get different perspectives. But it's hard to move forward sometimes when we keep playing catch up. I don't know what the answer is.

 

[jnblsm]

THIS

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk

 

[Butler]

I remember the good ol days on Websleuths when one had to actually read all the threads before commenting.

It does get frustrating when old tired topics are brought up again. Even if one just reads the media thread to catch up, it would be helpful. For example - A comment made saying it wasn't known they arrived at the campground on Thursday evening. Then a comment that the fact they were there the day before didn't come out for months, then it somehow becomes a fact that JM & VDK must have lied about when they got there. Going to back to the media thread cleared it up for me within a few minutes of reading.

I am not calling anyone out, just making an observation.

 

[Beezneez]

It does get frustrating when old tired topics are brought up again. Even if one just reads the media thread to catch up, it would be helpful. For example - A comment made saying it wasn't known they arrived at the campground on Thursday evening. Then a comment that the fact they were there the day before didn't come out for months, then it somehow becomes a fact that JM & VDK must have lied about when they got there. Going to back to the media thread cleared it up for me within a few minutes of reading.

I am not calling anyone out, just making an observation.

True, there are things that don't hurt in reviewing. This is a total exaggeration, but when someone posts, 26 threads in, something like- "wait, the kid is missing?" it is a little :doh:.
Although, with all of the different stories, versions, and screwball people contributing to the dustcloud, I can almost see how that is an afterthought. Trying to catch up here from the beginning would be impossible, I mean there are all those minnows and mountain lions and PI's and planned abduction/secret adoptions, everyone named Deorr. Good grief.
*Screwball is intended to insult the unique people of the facebook groups. Not anyone here.

 

[ZooSleuth]

It does get frustrating when old tired topics are brought up again. Even if one just reads the media thread to catch up, it would be helpful. For example - A comment made saying it wasn't known they arrived at the campground on Thursday evening. Then a comment that the fact they were there the day before didn't come out for months, then it somehow becomes a fact that JM & VDK must have lied about when they got there. Going to back to the media thread cleared it up for me within a few minutes of reading.

I am not calling anyone out, just making an observation.

IMO this is one of the main problems with having Websleuths on a message board platform. There's no good way to collect data/facts and retain them for others to easily access. For the most part, facts get buried and obscured under heaps of posts.

As a web developer, I see many ways we could improve the way Websleuths operates but it would involve writing a new platform for WS from the ground up. I am preparing a thread on this to get feedback on some ideas I have.

 

[courtneyb]

I remember the good ol days on Websleuths when one had to actually read all the threads before commenting.

I guess I don't mind answering a simple, non-derailing question. It doesn't frustrate me or make me think that a person hasn't read the information available here. As someone who HAS read all of the threads (believe it or not, lol) on this case, I still often see from other members' posts that I missed something here or there. If you take one of the 26 threads here, just one, and go through and count the number of time members post and say "Oh! I must have missed that, thanks!" or the equivalent, you would see numerous posts containing this statement. Obviously, reading every thread does not guarantee 100% retention, due to normal memory limitations, the length of time and number of threads a case spans, and just not comprehending correctly the information one read.

If someone asks a "stupid" question, one that is a hot button issue that almost always derails the thread, or the context of their post containing the question indicates that the member is going down a path that will lead to a breakdown in the discussion, then, I can understand the frustration and passive aggressive comments about people who "don't read" the threads.

But, if a member asks a question that I thought everyone knew the answer to (maybe even thought it was a dumb question or wondered how they could have missed that info), but obviously isn't trying to instigate anything or go off on a distracting tangent, I would just answer it and move on. Instead of having 20 posts thereafter with members griping about the member who "doesn't read all the threads". That's much more derailing than just being polite, answering the question and moving on.

I don't hold it against a member who asks such a question. And, I'd hope that no one would hold it against me when I ask such an obviously "dumb" question. Everyone here has a large amount of knowledge of this case, and of the discussions here, but I can guarantee that each one of us here has gotten something wrong before, or has missed something. I have gone back to try to find an answer to a question I had, but was not able to find it. In those cases, I will ask here, usually with an apology for being so obviously daft that I couldn't find/overlooked this info before resorting to asking and raising the ire of those who either never, ever have asked a "stupid" question or won't allow themselves to look as lazy and dumb as those who do ask.

Taking a break. I apologize for being OT, derailing momentarily, any dumb questions I asked and for annoying those who know so much more than myself.

 

[Onebest]

Maybe just as an excuse to bring it up, since Nate asked if there were any rumours they wanted to clear up. It seemed to be something the parents had discussed in advance, so maybe they'd planned to bring it up in the interview to make it seem like Deorr was still alive at the store. Then they changed the time as an excuse to bring it up - they're correcting a rumour, they're not just randomly informing the world of their (false) alibi even though no one asked about it, which would look very suspicious.

Yes, it's a stupid thing to do and could easily be proven false (as I believe it has been, as the clerk didn't remember seeing a boy), but claiming that someone in the store was playing with DeOrr was stupid too - Klein said they tracked down the witness and he didn't remember even seeing a child. Maybe it's just a case of Vernalization, where the parents get carried away and think their story sounds more convincing if they add loads of details - not thinking at the time that it will easily be proven false.

Either they made it up themselves, or there was a genuine rumour going around that the clerk saw a man at 6pm with a filthy, bawling boy (even though the clerk said no such thing), in which case why would Vernal be so quick to say Yep, that was me and DeOrr but the got the time wrong, rather than No, that didn't happen; or Holy Smoke, that could have been my son with his abductor!

Exactly! Trying to prove Deoor was alive earlier which more then likely means he was not! JMO

 

[Onebest]

It does get frustrating when old tired topics are brought up again. Even if one just reads the media thread to catch up, it would be helpful. For example - A comment made saying it wasn't known they arrived at the campground on Thursday evening. Then a comment that the fact they were there the day before didn't come out for months, then it somehow becomes a fact that JM & VDK must have lied about when they got there. Going to back to the media thread cleared it up for me within a few minutes of reading.

I am not calling anyone out, just making an observation.

From another perspective I rather do enjoy the occasional new perspectives from new posters. I hope we dont discourage them. I actually recommend newbies START with the media links, time lines and maps link at the FIRST PART of each thread. It will get you up to speed without reading through ALL the threads and perhaps show the changes and variables in the history of Deoors disappearance. But please dont be discouraged. Its has evolving dynamics sometimes in several directions daily!

 

[Lillahazel]

I guess I don't mind answering a simple, non-derailing question. It doesn't frustrate me or make me think that a person hasn't read the information available here. As someone who HAS read all of the threads (believe it or not, lol) on this case, I still often see from other members' posts that I missed something here or there. If you take one of the 26 threads here, just one, and go through and count the number of time members post and say "Oh! I must have missed that, thanks!" or the equivalent, you would see numerous posts containing this statement. Obviously, reading every thread does not guarantee 100% retention, due to normal memory limitations, the length of time and number of threads a case spans, and just not comprehending correctly the information one read.

If someone asks a "stupid" question, one that is a hot button issue that almost always derails the thread, or the context of their post containing the question indicates that the member is going down a path that will lead to a breakdown in the discussion, then, I can understand the frustration and passive aggressive comments about people who "don't read" the threads.

But, if a member asks a question that I thought everyone knew the answer to (maybe even thought it was a dumb question or wondered how they could have missed that info), but obviously isn't trying to instigate anything or go off on a distracting tangent, I would just answer it and move on. Instead of having 20 posts thereafter with members griping about the member who "doesn't read all the threads". That's much more derailing than just being polite, answering the question and moving on.

I don't hold it against a member who asks such a question. And, I'd hope that no one would hold it against me when I ask such an obviously "dumb" question. Everyone here has a large amount of knowledge of this case, and of the discussions here, but I can guarantee that each one of us here has gotten something wrong before, or has missed something. I have gone back to try to find an answer to a question I had, but was not able to find it. In those cases, I will ask here, usually with an apology for being so obviously daft that I couldn't find/overlooked this info before resorting to asking and raising the ire of those who either never, ever have asked a "stupid" question or won't allow themselves to look as lazy and dumb as those who do ask.

Taking a break. I apologize for being OT, derailing momentarily, any dumb questions I asked and for annoying those who know so much more than myself.

Good post. I feel a little less like a stupid newbie now

For me it's sometimes hard to remember fact from fiction not because of SM but because the two main suspects can't seem to do so. I constantly find myself saying well didn't they say such and such in an interview? Then I think oh right I better filter that out because it came out of VDK or JM's mouth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rayemonde]

Nobody said LE did say that! As I said, SB simply mentioned (paraphrase) he didn't feel IR was a good candidate because of comprehension of questions. He had to explain it someway and he did it as tactfully as he could.

Do you have a link to where Bowerman says this? I'm sure he never said anything about "comprehension of questions" or anything like that.

 

[Rayemonde]

Was wondering about that myself....as someone who has read every post on every page on every thread...I notice that some things just keep getting recycled over and over and over. That's not meant as a criticism, just an observation. On one hand, some ideas are worth recycling because you get different perspectives. But it's hard to move forward sometimes when we keep playing catch up. I don't know what the answer is.

When I'm not sure about something, I go to Google and type:

Site:websleuths.com "timber creek"

And then whatever I want to search for. This will search the websleuths site for DeOrr's discussion threads (as "Timber Creek" is in the title of every thread, but not the media timeline thread). So say I wanted to know why people seem to think the parents went to the Silver Dollar, or why people think this is important - rather than writing a post asking why people think this, I could go to Google and type:

Site:websleuths.com "timber creek" "silver dollar"

And click search, and then I can easily browse through every mention of the Silver Dollar in all of DeOrr's discussion threads.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

Do you have a link to where Bowerman says this? I'm sure he never said anything about "comprehension of questions" or anything like that.

This is your second request, Ray. I'd like to see the link too. Thanks for asking for it again.

 

[Mickshawn]

Just checking the Leadore weather...Getting there...http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?lat=44.6802&lon=-113.3581#.VusrfubPJdk

 

[erinp]

SB said he did not do a poly because of his mental aptitude. It was said something like - "you can only poly someone who understands the questions."

Case in point - how have VDK amd JM been doing recalling their lies?

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/01/lemhi-sheriff-deorrs-parents-have-been-less-than-truthful-are-suspects-in-childs-disappearance/

this article quotes SB saying Reinwand did do a poly but it was inconclusive